美國特朗普政府宣布退出《巴黎協定》是當前全球氣候治理中最受輿論關注的問題,對事態發展趨勢的判斷和事件影響的評估是最為亟需的。本文系統分析了特朗普政府上任后推行的一系列"去氣候化"政策,以及其退出《巴黎協定》的主要動因和可能形式,同時量化評估了這些內政外交的"倒退"對美國實施國家自主貢獻目標以及全球氣候治理格局的實質影響,并據此提出了中國應對全球氣候治理新形勢變化的對策和建議。研究表明,特朗普政府"美國優先"的能源政策根植于復興制造業和加大基礎設施投資的經濟利益動機,隨著特朗普"去氣候化"進程持續發酵,諸多氣候政策面臨存續風險,美國實施國家自主貢獻將面臨嚴峻挑戰,"倒行政策"將有可能使美國溫室氣體排放出現反彈。如果不考慮中、高危氣候政策,美國2025年溫室氣體排放也僅能相對2005年下降11.0%—14.9%,距離下降26%—28%的國家自主貢獻目標相去甚遠。同時,特朗普政府拒絕繼續履行向發展中國家提供氣候資金支持的義務,將有可能導致綠色氣候基金拖欠資金總額上升117%,并進一步挫傷全球低碳投資的信心。沒有美國的全球氣候治理3.0時代將呈現出新的復雜特征,并不可避免地造成減排、資金和領導力缺口的持續擴大,也不排除后續會出現消極的跟隨者,整體進程將可能進入一個低潮周期。雖然國際社會對中國引領全球氣候治理充滿期待,但中國仍應審慎對待,長遠謀劃應對氣候變化的內政外交戰略,而不應將"氣候舉旗"看作是一蹴而就的短期策略,對各種要求中國發揮"領導作用"的說法保持清醒頭腦。在今后氣候談判中,美國仍有較大可能會二次"要價",中國作為排放大國的壓力依然不容小覷,中美氣候關系需要再定位。

Trump Administration’s withdraw from the Paris Agreement has become the most concerned issue in global climate governance worldwide currently,thus it is necessary and urgent to make prudent and objective judgement and assessment on the future potential development trends and impact of this issue.This article systematically analyzes the series of‘undo’climate policies announced or implemented by the Trump Administration,and its main motivations and possible ways of withdraw from the Paris Agreement.Meanwhile,this article assesses the quantitative effects of these ‘retrogression’in domestic and international policies on the achievement of US’s national determined contribution and substantial impact on the global climate governance pattern,and accordingly puts forward suggestions on China’s response to the new situation changes in global climate regime.The study shows that the‘American first’energy policy of the Trump administration is originated from the economic incentives of revival of manufacturing and increasing infrastructure investment.As the Trump‘Undo’climate policies proceeds,a lot of Obama climate policies may be at risk,US’s future greenhouse gas emissions may increase again and it will make US difficult in achieving its nationally determined contribution.Without consideration of highly and moderately vulnerable climate polices,US’s 2025 emissions may roughly 11.0%-14.9% below 2005 level,which is far from the 26%-28%nationally determined contribution target.At the same time,the Trump Administration’s refusal to continue to fulfill the obligation to provide climate financial support to developing countries,will likely lead to a 117%increase of GCF debt fund,and further dampen the global confidence in low-carbon investments.The global climate governance 3.0era without US will show some new and complex features,and will inevitably lead to the continuing widen of mitigation,finance and leadership gaps.The possibility of negative followers cannot be excluded neither and the whole process will likely fall into a low period of cycle.Although the international community is full of expectations for China to take lead in global climate governance in the future,China should remain cautious and determine its strategy in addressing climate through long-term plans.China shall now treat‘flagging’as a short term strategy,otherwise should stay sober-minded to the arguments that asking China to play a‘leading role’.In the future climate negotiations,US may still search for renegotiation with high probability.As a major emitter,the pressure China may face shall never be underestimated,and there is a need to reposition the China-US climate relationship.